Canadian Capitalist

46 responses so far ↓

• 1 Eric // Mar 20, 2008 at 8:13 am

  Indeed, as a new home owner I’m funnelling money into various projects, I don’t really have any furniture, and the oil tank needs to be replaced soon. All the time and money I used to spend on activities and fun now goes to looking after mr. housy. Not that there aren’t pluses, I do like the feeling of satification when I complete an improvement project, and I also like not having a noisy neighbour only 6″ away. But houses cost more than they appear.

  Tuna is surprisingly expensive. I’ve had to switch to ‘toona’, a bit rubbery, but ok.

• 2 Ben // Mar 20, 2008 at 8:34 am

  Houses definitely have a tendency to absorb cash, whether it be on needs (roof, furnace, etc) or wants (kitchen reno, finished basement). Too many people lack the basic financial math skills to realize that a simple “It’s the best investment we can make” statement simply does not cover all scenarios (lack of financial education in school is one of my pet peeves, but that’s another story). Each buyer, in each market, brings a distinct set of variables to their buying situation that can be quantified (with some reasonable assumptions) to indicate whether home ownership will be a financial gain or loss for them. Failing to account for the maintenance costs and one-time expenses CC outlines above will significantly misrepresent the output. Mortgage interest, property taxes, and utilities are only the tip of the iceberg. Of course, there are some factors of affordability requiring a crystal ball: will house prices continue to rise quickly in my home-buying horizon, and will interest rates rise or fall, etc.
  In a lot of calculations, especially at today’s high house prices, renting will come out ahead financially, at least from a short-term cashflow perspective. But I, and many of you, have decided that the creature comforts and freedoms of owning a home more than offset the cashflow benefits of renting a one-bedroom apartment in a smelly tower. Long-term, however, I believe there is no better investment than buying a home, paying off the mortgage quickly, and living there for life.

• 3 Novice // Mar 20, 2008 at 9:17 am

  Houses definitely are money pits; my wife and I bought a nice house in a nice but not really toney neighbourhood of Toronto (Don Mills area) and paid $40,000 over (the low) asking against 6 other couples and got it and it was what we had budgeted for (taxes/utilities/mortgage costs are 28% of gross income), so I’m still pleased about that. Thankfully the sale of our loft was able to let us make a good size downpayment but also let us hold onto tens of thousands of dollars - this first year alone we’ve had to upgrade the wiring significantly, do minor plumbing, and buy new appliances; and this spring the roof needs reshingling, the furnace/ac need replacing, a fence needs building and the attic needs foam insulation. We had a home inspection done before buying so none of these were a shock (unlike the people in that article, who seemed unaware that these costs exist) but it’s still a kick in the gut. I think there’s no better long-term investment like the reader above, but there’s also a significant personal satisfaction involved in coming home to ‘our house’ each day (though it’s more like 80/20 the bank’s house and ours)… As to whether or not the housing market rises or falls in the next couple years, it’s all paper wins or paper losses for us; we have no intentions of ever moving again. What is important though is that our neighbourhood stays nice, that the school up the street isn’t closed, and that neither of us is out of work for longer than 3 months. That’s more of a real worry to us; a housing price drop would only affect us under very specific circumstances. It’s a gamble, I’ll admit; but it’s one I’m willing to take. One other thing to mention - it’s not that easy to find a nice house in Toronto to rent, I looked into it. Most are semi’s, some are former boarding houses, and usually if they are for rent they border other renters (not to say they don’t exist, but it’s a whole lot easier to find a nice house to buy than a nice house to rent given the market now, this may change).

• 4 Traciatim // Mar 20, 2008 at 9:31 am

  From that article all it looks like is a bunch of people whining about spending too much money and not being able to trade off lifestyle.

  Did you look at the second picture of the couple in their kitchen. I sure hope that’s a stock photo, because that stove, counter top and vent probably was 15-20 grand. WTF?! They are complaining about money?

  Maybe they should try using a coil stove that they got from someone else for a hundred bucks and cook on that a while rather than shop out of the home depot catalog in the “I’m rich and spoiled” section.

• 5 Traciatim // Mar 20, 2008 at 9:35 am

  Another note . . . I love this quote:

  “We saw places with dirty dishes in the sink and underpants on the floor and one where all the bedrooms had been divided into two because three families were sharing one house.”

  Yeah, but I bet with three families they could actually afford the place! It’s called sacrificing now for your future.

• 6 0xCC // Mar 20, 2008 at 9:45 am

  All those costs of buying a house aren’t too bad if you make a move to be closer to a new job. I moved last year because I changed jobs and now that I am doing my 2007 tax return I am getting the tax back on a lot of the costs of selling my old house and buying my current house. I get to deduct the real estate commissions on the sale of the old house, the land transfer tax on the purchase of the new house, the legal fees for both the sale and the purchase and the little bit of interest I had to pay because we closed on the new house a week before we closed on the old house so we owned two houses for a week.

• 7 Canadian Capitalist // Mar 20, 2008 at 10:06 am

  I agree with Traciatim that the people profiled in the article are whining. They made choices and they have to live with it. I was especially stunned by Laura and Ren, who say they “did the math” and didn’t want to keep spending $50K over two years [on rent]. Okay, let’s do the math for them: they bought a $380K home and spent $60K more in renos (not to mention help from their parents, but we’ll ignore that). So, their house cost them say $450K. Just the interest on their home loan at 5% would cost $45K over two years. And they haven’t budgeted for property taxes, maintenance, utilities, buying snow shovels, lawn mowers and a million other expenses. I don’t have a clue how they can claim that they did the math.

• 8 Re: money // Mar 20, 2008 at 10:07 am

  In Toronto I see more realtors charging discount fees of 1-3% of sale price, instead of the regular 5-6%.

• 9 Al // Mar 20, 2008 at 10:27 am

  I’m in the “my house ate my money” crowd too, but only after renting and saving for a decade. We were well prepared for most of the costs though we did underestimate maintenance a bit. We’re definitely not in over our heads like the people in the article and don’t have to skimp on everything, but we do tend to live modestly as a choice.

  Traciatim,

  You kind of hit on a preference of mine with your second comment. I look for the house that isn’t well staged. I don’t care if there are dirty dishes, they’ll be gone when I move in (or shortly after). You look at the bones of the house (windows, roof, furnace, wiring, etc) and if the staging is poor then you’ll get a better deal on the place.

• 10 Novice // Mar 20, 2008 at 10:27 am

  Re: Posting above. I believe that realtors may discount commisions, but the commission is shared between the selling and the buying agent. So if they are separate people, the selling agent may only charge 2.5% but the buying agent will get 3% (total 5.5%). Sometimes the realtor acts for both the selling and the buying agent (I would never allow this, someone is getting shafted) and might do the whole thing for 4% - quite a windfall for them. A better approach may be the FSBO but with the help of an online realtor, who can help set the comparitive price, get it listed on mls etc and charge you 1/2 a percent commission (and remember, the buying agent will ding you for 2.5% still).

• 11 Michael James // Mar 20, 2008 at 10:32 am

  On the reader’s point about fretting over an extra 0.5% paid to a mutual fund company vs. paying 6% to a real estate company, there is an important difference. The extra 0.5% is paid every year. The 6% is paid only each time you move. These two amounts are about equally exorbitant if you move every 12 years. Despite the apparent large difference between these two percentages, they both deserve attention in trying to reduce them.

• 12 Investor Within // Mar 20, 2008 at 11:07 am

  I do appreciate this topic tremendously because I am still in school and it will be a while before I purchase my first home. This is definitely an eye opener and a valuable lesson was learned today. Good comments too.

• 13 squawkfox // Mar 20, 2008 at 11:21 am

  I continue to rent despite having considerable savings which some would consider a fine down payment. As long as I invest my savings I will be out ahead. I programmed a Rent. Vs. Buy Calculator, which given my market and rent costs, tells me renting is by far the better option.

  The sad truth about buying a house is the actual cost far exceeds the simple sticker price of the home. It’s not hard to spend several times the purchase price of the house when considering all the costs. For example, a buyer of an average $325,000 detached house who takes out a conventional 25-year mortgage will pay for that house twice in interest alone. A $325,000 house, at 6.5 percent interest rate, over 25 years (with $2,194.42 in monthly payments) costs in total a whopping $658,326.98. That’s $333,326.98 in interest alone!

• 14 nobleea // Mar 20, 2008 at 11:22 am

  Of course, buyers don’t pay commissions, only sellers. Mind you, the commissions are buried in the purchase price, so technically I guess buyers do as well.

• 15 Big Cajun Man // Mar 20, 2008 at 12:00 pm

  And don’t forget the extra $50.00 you need to pay this year to the City of Ottawa, because it snowed too much!

  A house is not really an investment, it is a place to live that hopefully you can enjoy, and make a HOME out of it.

  -Larry O’BrienC8j

• 16 nobleea // Mar 20, 2008 at 12:01 pm

  I read that Toronto Life article. I don’t know where they find these people, are all twenty somethings of the opinion that they ‘deserve’ a 30K gourmet kitchen? Unreal.
  I saw a few comments in the article that the housing market is ‘different’ this time. Things are never different. History always repeats itself.

  And is Toronto really 50% same-sex relationships??

• 17 Four Pillars // Mar 20, 2008 at 12:49 pm

  That was a strange article. I like the areas they were mentioned - very pricey for first time home buyers (or 2nd or 3rd time for that matter).

  I think that real estate comes out ahead only if you get the appreciation (which we’ve gotten over the last decade). If you don’t have that, then you have probably lost money and maybe a lot of it.

  The other big factors is renos - sure you get some money back - sometimes more than what you put in but the way some people approach renos is silly. If you tear out a reasonably good kitchen and put in a more modern one then you have just thrown away quite a bit of $$.

  Mike

• 18 ThickenMyWallet // Mar 20, 2008 at 12:58 pm

  Toronto Life loves to pursue an agenda that Toronto is just like upper west side in New York City- full of chic urbanites who eat at fusion restaurants and summer in the Hamptons when it is furtherest from that (the city is more like a poor man’s Chicago). All their articles have that spin on it so they went and found people who fit into their city view (hence the $30K kitchen).

  if you read the editor’s comment in that issue, they admitted they had a terrible time finding people for the article- so they probably got the absolute worse case scenarios.

  A house is like any other capital asset- 25-40% is acquisition costs and the rest if upkeep (assuming you kept the house for 20 years).

• 19 0xCC // Mar 20, 2008 at 1:00 pm

  Squakfox: a $325,000 house will be worth $602,531 in 25 years using a 2.5% inflation rate. Using 2% as the inflation rate it will be worth $533,196 and using 3% as the inflation rate it will be worth $680,477. So it isn’t like using a nominal interest rate over a 25 year period and then comparing with constant dollars is a fair comparison.

  Of course the house will need to be maintained over a 25 year period in order for it to be worth that much and you could argue that the maintenance costs could at least equal inflation.

• 20 0xCC // Mar 20, 2008 at 1:04 pm

  Sorry, missed the w in squawkfox…

• 21 Novice // Mar 20, 2008 at 1:13 pm

  Traciatim & CC — as someone who did buy a house in the Toronto area, and though I do think there is some whining in their comments, there is also some basic truth which is that the housing market is really, really hard on people first getting into it in Toronto. You’ll note that these people aren’t whining about having a house that’s too small or cramped, they just didn’t want to live in a crimefest neighbourhood. Now the legitimate counter to this is hey, you don’t need to live in the city, that’s your choice which is fair enough. But close suburbs are also expensive, and gas is $1.08 a litre which is an uncapitalized expense. Not to mention leaving work at 4pm to get home from downtown TO to pick the kids up from daycare is a not an option for everyone.

• 22 Traciatim // Mar 20, 2008 at 2:36 pm

  Novice, again it’s wants vs needs though. I mean come on, would their life be any more miserable if they had of just moved over to Fredericton in New Brunswick, got jobs as teachers there, and got a fantastic house for 200K, great for 170, decent for 140 and livable for 100K (about where I am, in another city)?

  I mean come on, I’m a decently high ranking tech guy in a huge corporation, and my GF runs a business as an aesthetician. It’s not like we’re coining it, but we’re not starving to death. My home I purchased last year for 102K, is that because I think I deserve to live in an average bungalow on a small lot? No. It’s because you have to start somewhere, and the starting line is not the same line as the finish line.

  It’s a lifestyle choice, if you make it, don’t complain about how hard it is.

• 23 Novice // Mar 20, 2008 at 3:07 pm

  T, that’s a fair point but it’s also not so easy to uproot your family and children from their home (I view the city as my home too) that they’ve known all their life either in pursuit of cheaper real estate (which often also includes lower wages). I don’t think I was complaining about prices but believe a part of the article is warning that toronto is becoming a city of two halves - renters and owners and that it may be that way for a long time to come (now, they also said that in the 1990s so who the hell knows). I’m will say I feel some of their pain and have some sympathy for their plight - like I did for my relatives out west when the economies of Saskatechewan and Manitoba were hurting. I personally hope that prices settle downwards just a bit, as I think that will be long-term more beneficial for my city than if we evolve to Manhattan-esque prices.

• 24 Traciatim // Mar 20, 2008 at 3:20 pm

  Well, trust me, I also know about uprooting your family since growing up I lived in 4 different cities here and one time way out in the middle of no where, shortest in one city was 1 year in grade 11. So High School was grade 10, 11, and 12 which was all split by moving.

  I still stand by all the comments, the answers are
  1) Move
  2) Rent and Save
  3) Buy now and sacrifice (not buy 30K kitchens)

  They chose an option not on this list which is:
  -1) Buy now and remodel to your taste without thinking about how much money you are spending.

  I do agree that prices need to do something in most of the large cities in the country. It may take just stagnation for a few years until median incomes catch up, and it may take a big correction which will put families like these under water. Either way something eventually has to give.

• 25 Traciatim // Mar 20, 2008 at 4:19 pm

  Add to that, I’m not sure that your example is true that lower real estate means lower incomes. Looking at the May 29th 2007 edition of ‘The Daily’ from Stats Canada puts Saint John in 2005 at a median family income of 57,000 and Toronto at 61,800. Now if we increase these by about 3% per year for 3 years for 2008, we get 62300 and 67500. That’s an 8.3% increase.

  Take the CREA stats for average home selling price for February 2008 and in Saint John the average home sold for 146,600 in Saint John. In Toronto the average was 382,448. That’s a 160% increase.

  In order to afford an average home, the median family needs to pay 2.3 times income for the average home here and 5.7 times income in Toronto. Which one do you really think is going to have the less stressed lifestyle? Sure, if you like not getting across your city in 20 minutes in rush hour then you may pick Toronto in this case. Now granted, Toronto is a cool city . . . but worth paying 160% more for your home cool?

  Oh, add in that our unemployment rate is at 3.3% in Saint John, and in Toronto it’s 6.1%, you would think that around here prices would be booming . . . but they are staying pretty reasonable.

• 26 TonyR // Mar 20, 2008 at 4:22 pm

  Novice and T both have points. A lot of people grown attached to their city and then factor in the TO world-class wannabe factor and it’s next to impossible for someone to move out of there. Imagine the response they’d get from their friends if someone declared they were moving to NB or SK? (for example)
  Out west, it’s different. A lot of people in AB (who own homes) are cashing in and moving to SK or MB and buying a better home cash. Generally they’re thought to be smart. (A lot are also SK-born people going home.)

• 27 telly // Mar 20, 2008 at 4:28 pm

  Traciatim, I agree entirely with your last comment. For some reason, people have a tendency to justify adding a 30K kitchen to a 1/2 million dollar home but would never do the same with a more modest (say $150k) home. The people (like those profiled here) that say thay plan to stay in their new home forever are also the same people that justify adding a 30k kitchen because it’ll increase the resale value. ??? These people will also likely get their house appraised every year just to be able to tell people our house is worth $X today. Like someone said above, if you don’t sell, it’s not realized and thus irrelevant.

  Lastly, how does the bank approve two teachers in their early 30’s for $650k?!?!

• 28 TonyR // Mar 20, 2008 at 4:30 pm

  Maybe they went to a US lender.

• 29 Canadian Capitalist // Mar 20, 2008 at 4:35 pm

  squawkfox: The buy-vs-rent argument is riddled with assumptions. You’ll have to guess how much markets will return in the future, how much price appreciation can be expected in real estate, how much renting will cost in the future etc. etc. I’ll be surprised if we can get one of the estimates right. If the estimates are wrong, how can the results be right?

  If you’re arguing that RE is at a cyclical peak in many markets and first-time home buyers should wait for an attractive opportunity, you may be right. That’s different from saying that renting is better than buying in all market conditions.

  Novice: While I agree with your point that it’s not always feasible to uproot your family and move away, there are other options like Traciatim pointed out.

  Yes, the RE market in many large cities are tough on first-time buyers. But that’s the reality. We can do little about it. What we can do is adapt ourselves to the situation.

  I personally would have opted for renting for a bit and saving money for a larger down payment. It’s true that while saving for a down payment, prices could go up (we personally experienced this in Ottawa when we first purchased a home) but that’s life. But isn’t it critical to make sure that the price we pay fits comfortably within the household budget which also includes an occasional treat?

• 30 Novice // Mar 20, 2008 at 5:14 pm

  Nothing gets people going like talking real estate, does it? Great discussion everyone btw. I personally do home improvements to make our lives easier, and have no ‘payback’ in mind (with the exception of insulation and furnace upgrades) when I do them. I’m amazed when I watch shows like ‘buy me’ and hear people say that they need to get x amount out of their house - a house is only worth what someone else is willing to pay, what the buyer needs is irrelevant. And (not trying to be a toronto spokesperson) not everyone in TO is as reckless as the people in the article (excluding the last couple, whom I thought quite responsible actually, roncesvalles is nice enough but has some less than desireable qualities too). We paid 3.5x salary for our house, and we lived in a condo for 5 years that was 3x just my salary alone when I bought it. That said, factoring in daycare will make life hard for the next couple years for sure!

• 31 squawkfox // Mar 20, 2008 at 6:53 pm

  Indeed, my numbers make a lot of assumptions. Reality can easily vary wildly. My calculation is a huge simplification of the matter. A proper prediction for this would be as easy as predicting the weather on the same time scale. Albeit, the values I am assuming are not hugely out of sync with broad averages…unless you live in Vancouver.

• 32 Phil S // Mar 20, 2008 at 7:41 pm

  CC. You forgot about condo fees for those of us who chose the condo route. Although I am mortgage free, I still shell out $350 a month in condo fees. I guess it pays for landscaping, snowplowing and maintenance / upkeep of other common elements… But the point is that I’m mortgage free but still shelling out cash on condo fees + property taxes that add up to about $600 a month.

  As one of the other posters mentioned, renting is also problematic. When your lease is up, the rent could shoot for the moon. Also, good quality rental apartments at reasonable prices in nice locations with all amenities (like air conditioning) are REALLY hard to come by in Toronto.

  For the $600 a month I pay for my 1BR condo in the Kingsway Village in Toronto, I can at least enjoy my neighbourhood; if my condo fees shoot for the moon, then I can get on the board of my condo building to try to do something about it; I can paint the walls whatever colour I want and make whatever interior renovations I want without making some landlord pissed off enough to keep the damage deposit or make him/her rich because of the upgrade.

  I think if I somehow managed to find an equivalent place to rent, then it would probably be about $1000 to $1100 a month. So, from a return on investment standpoint, it may not make much fiscal sense to tie up that much money in a place, but I prefer those small things that make me enjoy my little condo. I have been thinking of upgrading to a bigger place, but I also like my current mortgage-free status! So, I have the luxury to wait around until the “right” opportunity comes up sometime in the future.

• 33 Phil S // Mar 20, 2008 at 7:44 pm

  In the meantime, I can save my disposable income for those “other” investments that we have so much fun talking about! =0)

• 34 Max // Mar 20, 2008 at 8:47 pm

  @PhilS:

  When your lease is up, the rent could shoot for the moon.

  Not in Ontario. Rent is protected against bait and switch tactics. Each year there is a maximum rent increase (between 1 and 3% historically) that is dictated by some branch of the Ontario Government.

• 35 Phil S // Mar 21, 2008 at 10:03 am

  To Max. Then someone should tell that to the landlord where I lived just prior to buying my condo. My rent went from $800 during my lease to $950 when my lease expired and I started going month-to-month. That’s more than an 18% increase and it was in Ontario!

• 36 Leading Edge Boomer // Mar 21, 2008 at 11:12 am

  I think that in choosing to own or rent, lifestyle choices take precedent over the investment choices. If you choose ownership ,a key is not to become house poor. You need some discretionary money to spend if you wish to enjoy some of what the world has to offer.

  For me , who took an early retirement in Ottawa, I chose a modest condo townhouse. Not for everyone, but it provides what I need. I am mortgage free. My combined taxes and condo fees are currently $415 per month.
  I try to practice reasonable conservation methods to keep my utility fees modest.

  As far as maintenance goes, retirement does supply some advantages. With lots of discretionary time , I can take the time to do those things I am able and willing to do myself.
  On top of that, having lots of time allows me to research, compare, and cross shop a lot more diligently than I could when I was working. This can result in savings for those things you need or want for your home. Something those who are looking ahead to retirement, should consider when deciding what will be the best type of living space for them.

• 37 sundae1888 // Mar 21, 2008 at 2:40 pm

  Let’s see… the couples profiled in TL were all stretching their money to the max to get their so-called “dream” home.

  On the other hand, hubby and I, making more money than any of the couples profiled, chose a condo for less than $250k, with no renovation needed. We did changed the carpet to hardwood flooring for $3k, apply a fresh coat of paint ourselves for maybe $150, plus $3k on IKEA furniture.

  Sure, we have much less space and cookie-cutting kitchen, nothing spectacular like the designer kitchens these couples have, but we can still afford indulgences like exotic vacations and $150/person meals. We don’t, putting that money into doubling our mortgage payment instead, but we can. And when our family outgrow this condo, we’ll have a lot more ammo to shop for one of the houses they can no longer afford to keep.

• 38 Traciatim // Mar 21, 2008 at 4:14 pm

  Sundae1888: Exactly my point, it’s a lifestyle choice. They think they ‘deserve it all’ rather than ‘deserving reality’. That’s the only problem here.

• 39 Thicken My Wallet » Blog Archive » What is the True Rate of Return on Real Estate? // Mar 25, 2008 at 7:04 am

  [...] admit my bias up-front: I do not consider residential real estate a good investment. The costs of residential home ownership or upkeep of residential real estate investments are too great relative to other forms of [...]

• 40 In Defence of Home Ownership // Mar 25, 2008 at 7:01 pm

  [...] that the home is the ‘best investment’ that most people make (of course, assuming that all housing-related expenses fit comfortably within a household budget). We know that it is not due to the usual claims [...]

• 41 plei // Mar 27, 2008 at 10:46 pm

  It’s worth noting one cost that people in Canada don’t pay that others in the US often do (or did) - yield spread premium. Home buyers in Canada have things better in that sense…

• 42 Winner and Weekend Reading - March 28, 2008 | Million Dollar Journey // Mar 28, 2008 at 5:31 am

  [...] Canadian Capitalist explains The Costs of Home Ownership.  [...]

• 43 Marianne O // Mar 28, 2008 at 11:48 am

  What hasn’t been mentioned yet (unless I missed it) is that the lesbian couple in the article apparently took possession of their house BEFORE getting a home inspection. Then they were shocked to see gaping holes and water staining.

  I just don’t understand how someone can commit to a purchase of this magnitude without taking the time & small outlay of cash to make sure it’s worth buying. If they fell in love with the house and wanted to make an unconditional offer (to boost the chances of acceptance) then they could have arranged a same-day or next-day home inspection. It’s done all the time.

  We paid for an inspection prior to bidding on a home that was attracting a lot of buyer interest. The inspection was great, but we dropped out of the bidding war when it moved above our top dollar. So we were out the cost of the inspection. It happens. The next time we bid conditional on inspection (as the house had been on the market for awhile, so we had a little leeway) and in the end closed the deal with another good inspection report in our pockets. Again, I just can’t fathom why anyone would CONSIDER taking possession based on their own limited look-see. Arrgghhhh.

• 44 Novice // Mar 28, 2008 at 3:37 pm

  I agree with poster above and actually also had a pre-offer home inspection (my parent’s said “what the hell is that?’) but in our case we were able to win the bidding war against 6 other couples, and though I don’t know for sure I’m positive some of it was that our offer had no conditions whatsoever. However, this was on the first house that my wife and I saw and both loved equally. I wonder if perhaps the couple above tried to do it the right way and couldn’t; I also wonder if my own behavior would have changed if we’d fallen in love 3 or 4 times, had 4 inspections, and 4 deals all get blown….

• 45 Fat Tony // Mar 30, 2008 at 1:56 pm

  ALWAYS HAGGLE WITH THE REAL ESTATE AGENT!!! Whether you are buying or selling.

  IF YOU DON’T GET HALF-COMMISSION, YOU ARE BEING RIPPED-OFF - find another agent who’s willing - there are 25,000 agents in Toronto.

  Example: if you are a buyer:
  Seller pays 5% commission. Of this 5%:
  2.5% goes to seller’s agent.
  2.5% goes to buyer’s agent.
  Buyers agent gives half (1.25%) to you.

• 46 Mortgage Slaves // Apr 14, 2008 at 4:47 am

  [...] Life had an excellent article some time back on mortgage slaves. The Canadian Capitalist has linked to this article before, and I think its an excellent question: is it worthwhile being house [...]

Leave a Comment